Recently on the AfD page for Comparisons between Donald Trump and fascism article, I have noticed that my removal of a personal attack has been removed: [1]
It seems to fit the bill of WP:PERSONALATTACK. If removing a personal attack isn't an option, then what should I do? Antitransphobe (talk) 21:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry I was aware I was slightly aggressive in my tone in my reversion. If a user makes a personal attack, it is only removable if the person is clearly WP:NOTHERE (i.e a WP:SPA) or the edit is spam. However all personal attacks made by a person will be noted. If a user makes a personal attack and does not retract it, you could bring it up at WP:ANI. Great Mercian actually had a case there that was just archived [2]. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I was actually sending an information to Great Mercian about his personal attacks. I have referred myself to these policies and misunderstood them, although I abode by the spirit of the policy when removing his comment. The {{RPA}} template was used once, so I thought about using it. What advice would you give to me when it is warranted to use it? Antitransphobe (talk) 23:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The editor who had the comment removed had almost zero edits outside the discussion and was shortly thereafter blocked for WP:RGW.
- I pretty much never delete a comment, unless it is from a sockpuppet or vandal eavesdropping in on a discussion with a (truely) outrageous statement. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 11:25, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dear ,thank you making changes in Danish Zehen Wikipedia, can you lock that Wikipedia? It's getting unwanted edit by other users, they haven't made wiki account too, just doing vandalism edit.
Just an request, Thanks a lot again. Eram7 (talk) 10:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Eram, I do not have the ability to protect/lock pages. If your worried about vandalism or disruptive editing, head to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and follow the instructions there for creating a report. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 12:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Well Fine, and thank you so much. Eram7 (talk) 12:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dear, can you review my contribution on Poonam Pandey grammatically error or anything else. Please help me to fix it. Am new herr but always edit genuine fact based.
Thank you 
Eram7 (talk) 16:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I reverted most of it due to WP:NPOV concern and WP:BLP violations. When you add stuff to an article (particularly if it seems controversial), make sure you have some like a reliable source .
- I'm fairly busy IRL and potentially not the best candidate for in detailed analysis, so my suggestion here would be to go to the WP:TEAHOUSE, or head over to
- Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user to seek someone focused on mentoring newcomers if you have further queries.
- Happy editing! Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jeju Air Flight 2216. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 18:51, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you going to go for "tit for tat" or are you going to read the edit summary I gave you here [3]. Multiple editors seem to agree that the note is a good placeholder. If you don't like it, fix it before removing it. Fantastic Mr. Fox 18:54, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you link where this was previously discussed? It is your job as the one who wants to reinstate the content to cite reliable sources that directly supports the material. This is not a WP:BLUESKY situation. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 18:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It wasn't previously discussed, it was added in by an editor who you reverted, then added back in by myself and improved upon by other editors. If the death toll being the highest needs to be sourced, how am I supposed to source it? Drop multiple lists from Aviation Safety Network, which will take a lot of time (that I don't have) to format and not look hideous? Or can we agree that 176 < 179 and save for any undisclosed Area 51 incidents there have been no sources stating any accident in the time periods stated exceed 179 in death toll. Fantastic Mr. Fox 19:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict)The correct course of action before blanking anything by the way (save for vandalism or WP:BLP violations) is
[citation needed]
. Fantastic Mr. Fox 19:23, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hii @Fantastic Mr. Fox , it's me @Callmehelper
I just wanted to apologise to you for my previous response.
Looking back to my reply, i realize that it was kinda rude reply, but tbh that's not my intention.
I really didn't mean to disrespect your valuable time and efforts. It's my frustration that i let it out very badly, which i shouldn't.
I will definitely make sure to be more respectful with my tone in the future.
I hope you will understand my side.
Thanks.
Much Regards. ✊ Callmehelper (talk) 17:25, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
